When the citizens of Eastern Europe rejected communism 18 years ago they were inspired by dissidents who told them that people have a right to "live in the truth" and that democracy equaled liberty and justice.

Now, 18 years later, democracy is in crisis in Eastern Europe, where people have come to realize that they have not gained truth, freedom or justice. Eastern Europe is going through the same crisis of political disillusionment as Western Europe.

While in Budapest last week, I read the German-language Budapester Zeitung.  It had a front-page article about the adoption of a bill against hate speech. This is the same bill that the European Union is imposing on all its member states. It restricts the freedom of the people, who are no longer allowed to say things that might be deemed offensive by "ethnic, sexual, religious or other minorities."

In Western Europe this legislation is not merely used to prosecute genuine racists, but is increasingly abused to clamp down on those who oppose the Islamization of their countries or on those who disapprove of homosexual behavior.

Here in Eastern Europe, authorities wish to do the same, putting in place legislation to silence the defenders of Hungary's national identity and traditional morality.

It has become obligatory for both pro- and anti-war commentators to never mention the possibility of victory in Iraq.

The most that anti-war people will admit is that the surge has gained a temporary military advantage in a war that cannot be won militarily. The most pro-war commentators will claim is that they see the possibility of "success" perhaps, maybe, someday, somehow.

But as of Veterans Day 2007, I think one can claim a very real expectation that next year the world may see a genuine, old-fashioned victory in the Iraq War.

In five years we will have overturned Saddam's government, killed, captured or driven out of country almost all Al Qaeda terrorists, suppressed the violent Shi'ite militias and induced the Sunni tribal leaders and their people to shun resistance and send their sons into the army and police and seek peaceful resolution of disputes.

And we will have stood up a multisectarian, tribally inclusive army capable of maintaining the peace that our troops established.

The U.S Comptroller General and head of the GAO, Government Accountability Office, has described the entitlements crisis facing this country as a "tsunami" that approaches while we continue to party on the beach.

What GAO head David Walker is talking about are the massive upcoming obligations under Social Security and Medicare that we have no funds to meet. Tens of trillions of dollars of supposed commitments, promises made to us by our government, that today we have no clue how we'll pay.

In those rare moments when our political "leaders" screw up sufficient courage to acknowledge this dark and ominous fiscal cloud hanging over us, the discussion is invariably technical. Proposed tax increases, cap increases, retirement age increases, benefit cuts, indexing -- all geared to "save the system."

But who has considered that, despite all the discussion about unfunded liabilities, what we really have on our hands is, at root and core, a moral crisis?

From Islamabad to London to Paris to Moscow to Los Angeles - wherever a flickering video image could reach - the nerves of the world became more frayed this week with the images of mass demonstrations in the streets and the stunning announcement that Hollywood writers have gone on strike for more humane working conditions.

The contract between the 12,000-member Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) expired Oct. 31. (Who knew it took 12,000 writers to produce the dreck coming out of Hollywood these days?)

Imminently we will be seeing the pathetic consequences of the strike: heartbreaking images of Jay Leno telling lame jokes (well, not all things will change), Jon Stewart silently making mere faces at the camera (his clever lines having been unwritten due to the strike), Stephen Colbert, denied the words written for him to mock Bill O'Reilly, forced to pointlessly over-gesticulate.

During the Second World War, the Nazis worked on plans to build the Messerschmitt Me 264 Amerikabomber, an airplane specially devised to fly suicide missions into Manhattan's skyscrapers.

Albert Speer, the Nazi minister for armaments, recalled in his diary Inside The Third Reich: "It was almost as if [Hitler] was in a delirium when he described to us how New York would go up in flames. He imagined how the skyscrapers would turn into huge blazing torches. How they would crumble while the reflection of the flames would light the skyline against the dark sky."

Hitler hated Manhattan. It was, he said, "the center of world Jewry." Less than 60 years later, Hitler's plans were executed by Moslem immigrants living in Germany. At the 2003 trial of the network around Mohamed Atta (the pilot who flew into the World Trade Center), Shahid Nickels, a German convert to Islam and a friend of Atta's, said that the Islamists had targeted Manhattan because it is "the center of world Jewry, and the world of finance and commerce controlled by it."

The parallels between Nazism and Islamism are overwhelming. Yet the subject is a taboo.

The House Democrat leadership delayed a planned vote this past week on ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007. The bill, introduced by Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, makes employment discrimination against homosexuals and bisexuals illegal.

One reason that momentum on moving the legislation has stalled is because Rep. Tammy Baldwin from Wisconsin wants a provision covering transsexuals and transgenders, originally in, then removed, put back in.

President Bush has indicated that, if passed, he will veto this legislation. And he should.  But beyond the bill's many technical constitutional difficulties, it's worth considering it in the context of the ongoing cultural war taking place in this country.

It's also especially instructive as to why the presidential campaign of Barack Hussein Obama has fizzled.

Every move the Putin administration makes today is dictated by the desire to shape Russia's future internal power structure and to set the course for the country's foreign and security affairs in general, and its relationship with the United States in particular for years to come.

Keeping the relationship with Washington on the verge of a crisis and inventing an imaginary "American enemy" is creating much needed legitimacy for the current Russian leadership, which now has only Mr. Putin's personal popularity as its political base.

The image of Russia surrounded by enemies is absolutely necessary for today's Russian ruling class of senior secret police officers, as it positions them in the eyes of the people as the saviors and defenders of Mother Russia.

Russia is being Re-Sovietized.